A controversy erupts in Worcester: All eyes on Smart Grid plan

Thursday

Jan 30, 2014 at 5:00 AM

It came in with a whisper, but all signs point toward an ending with one loud bang. Whether National Grid's proposal to build a 90-foot tower on Worcester's west side as part of its so-called Smart Grid pilot gets the green light or not, a quiet ending to what has become a full-blown controversy is unlikely. A quick ending, too, does not appear in the cards.

After several delays and continuations, hearings with the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) on a plan to erect a communications tower in one of two spots in the Tatnuck Square area have once more been put on hold. The next hearing was scheduled for Monday, Feb. 3, a continuation from a Jan. 13 hearing during which zoning board officials put off a decision and instead asked for the city's legal department to weigh in. Now, National Grid has sent a letter to the ZBA saying they will not be back for the next meeting.

“Working with the neighbors means delays,” says Ed White, vice president of customer and business strategy for National Grid. “If we were just to go do it, that would mean one thing. But the neighbors and ZBA asked us to explore other locations. It doesn't happen overnight. We're being honest, we're being open that we're trying to find the best solution. In some cases that's not the best solution for everyone.”

Some critics and opponents of National Grid's plans would say the company is only exploring other options because public pressure has grown. The company first planned to build the tower at the Cooks Pond substation on Tory Fort Lane. When neighbors and activists rose up in opposition, National Grid then identified a site at 597 Mill St. as an alternative. Company representatives were asked whether other locations had been considered. At the last ZBA meeting, zoning officials were not satisfied that National Grid had made a genuine effort in that regard.

Where to put the tower is only part of what has mushroomed into a mighty struggle between critics and National Grid. Privacy, security and health worries have leaped to the forefront and both sides have traded back-and-forths when it comes to studies, statistics and expert opinion on whether the technology is safe.

GET SMART?

At issue is National Grid's Smart Grid program, also referred to as Smart Energy Solutions. It is a two-pronged initiative that National Grid says is aimed both at improving an aging electrical infrastructure and empowering customers to more closely monitor their energy consumption. The company says it would also improve response times during power outages. As part of the pilot program, roughly 15,000 “smart meters” have been installed inside of a target area in Worcester. The program was approved by the state Department of Public Utilities in 2012 and National Grid had hoped to fully launch the pilot early this year. Customers have the option of “opting out” if they choose.

In a far-ranging interview with Worcester Magazine, White and Debbie Drew, National Grid's manager of New England Media Relations, say a little more than 5 percent of pilot customers have opted out, so far. White says there is no minimum number of participants required to implement the program.

“We sized the pilot knowing there would be some number opting out,” he says, adding the number of opt-outs falls within the company's expectations. “Some of the early opt-outs were because we hadn't sent enough communications out.”

That seems to counter National Grid's claims that it sent out sufficient notification; still, city officials acknowledge that several fliers and informational pamphlets were distributed. The local media was also writing about the program back in 2012 when it was being discussed.

HEALTH CONCERNS

One of the biggest concerns about the program centers on the smart meters and any potential health hazards. Critics – many of whom have come from outside Worcester and have attended ZBA and City Council meetings – have disseminated a wealth of information, including doctors' reports, statistics and other data they claim substantiate their concerns. The health worries center on RF, or radio frequency, emissions and whether the levels given off by smart meters are cause for concern. According to National Grid, the level emitted by smart meters is only slightly higher than that from an FM radio or TV broadcast signal and safer than the levels emitted by cell phones, laptop computers, cyber cafes, walkie-talkies and microwaves. Folks such as Claire Donegan, Patricia Burke and others, who have risen as fierce critics of smart meters, insist the data put forth by National Grid is either outdated or inaccurate. They also dismiss reports on similar programs in states such as Texas and California, which reached positive conclusions about smart meters. In an April 2011 report titled “Health Impacts of Radio Frequency Exposure from Smart Meters,” the California Council on Science and Technology (CCST) weighs in on a program run by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company. The CCST concludes: “The FCC standard provides a currently accepted factor of safety against known thermally-induced health impacts of smart meters and other electronic devices in the same range of RF emissions. Exposure levels from smart meters are well below the thresholds for such effects.” Additionally, according to the CCST report, “There is no evidence that additional standards are needed to protect the public from smart meters.”

A 2012 report on a similar program in Texas concludes, in part: “Decades of scientific research have not provided any proven or unambiguous biological effects from exposure to low-level radio frequency signals." The report also suggests that people who are ill “are highly receptive to negative suggestion and may demonstrate a 'nocebo response' as a result of these suggestions” concerning a link between electric and magnetic fields (EMF) and illnesses such as electromagnetic hypersensitivity.

According to the World Health Organization, “... To date, research does not suggest any consistent evidence of adverse health effects from exposure to radio frequency fields at levels below those that cause tissue heating.”

To White, the many reports and opinions come down to a conversation about which doctor is smarter.

“When it gets down to a disagreement between this report says this, this report says that, there's not much we can do,” he says. “We want everyone to be reasonable about the conversation. Their concerns are much greater than smart meters, smart grid. They're related to RF. We're not the overseer of all radio frequencies. I don't believe National Grid is in a position to say the FCC is wrong. We're well below the regulations. We're trying to walk the fine line of being respectful to those with different opinions.”

A MORATORIUM?

All the different reports appear to have done little to stem the tide of concern over potential health risks. Thea Fournier of Andover, who has a wellness practice and is a member of the Academy of Environmental Medicine, says the “burden of proof is on the utility company to provide evidence that smart meters are safe.” Fournier says the American Academy of Environmental Medicine has “upgraded its position form a call for caution to a recommendation for a full moratorium based on the acute onset or intensification of illnesses associated with smart meter installations.”

There is some support among city councilors for a moratorium. At-Large Councilor Mike Gaffney says he would be in favor of one and would like to see the ZBA hold off on any final decision until the council is able to receive and review information it has requested from its legal and health departments. District 2 Councilor Tony Economou says he, too, would support a moratorium.

The city's Department of Public Health is still in conversation with experts on RF energy, according to a spokesperson, and has not reached any conclusions, yet.

At-Large Councilor Konnie Lukes says she does not want a moratorium, but only because “that's just spinning wheels and avoiding a decision.” She outright wants National Grid's proposal to be denied.

“Councilors should, at the very least, have a resolution in opposition,” Lukes says.

PRIVATE EYES

Privacy concerns have also been raised, and for Gaffney that is a key issue.

“I look at it and say they don't need to know every appliance I have on,” he says.

Asked about privacy concerns, White says National Grid watches its grid 24 hours a day. He says part of the new technology is driven by customer complaints that the company does not respond quickly enough to outages.

“There's so much misinformation out there, so much distrust, so many conspiracy theories,” White says. “We're missing the facts. The fact is this is a meter that's going to record how much energy your home is using or your business, just like the meters before. With regard to what devices are being used in you home, quiet honestly we don't care. We want to provide more information in real time as to how you're using energy.”

For the record, both White and Drew say they would not hesitate in taking part in the Smart Grid Pilot.

“Absolutely,” White says when asked. “I have four young kids. I would never put their lives in jeopardy. We have more electronic devices in our house than you can believe. I look at it as this is how we are wired or not wired.”

In addition to health and privacy concerns, some critics have also questioned just how National Grid has spent the $3 million it designated for public outreach. According to Drew, the outreach budget includes, but is not limited to, direct customer mailings, collateral or brochures, customer communications materials such as door hangers, newsletters and video as well as materials for the company's new Sustainability Hub in Worcester near Clark University.

As for their recent media appearances (both White and Drew appeared with Jordan Levy on his WTAG afternoon talk show the day before meeting with Worcester Magazine), White says they are not on a media tour.

“We're trying to be responsive to the situation,” he says. “We've tried to keep the conversation going, but until we're ready to actually make decisions on programs and technology, there was not a heck of a lot to say.”

He says the criticism and accusations do get to him, sometimes.

“It does bother us when some customers think Deb Drew and Ed White are conspiring to do this bad thing,” White says. “Our whole existence is based on serving our customers.”

Have a story tip or idea? Call Walter Bird Jr. at 508-749-3166, ext. 322, or email him at wbird@worcestermagazine.com. Be sure to follow him on Twitter @walterbirdjr and catch Walter with Paul Westcott every Thursday morning at 8:35 on radio station WTAG 580AM for all things Worcester!